Queen’s Speech: Why On Earth Leave Out Reform of MPs’ Expenses?

By

Iain Martin

Nov 18, 2009 5:34 pm GMT

Now that the men in tights have gone home and the Queen has read out what was drafted for her by the government, there’s a row threatening to boil over at Westminster. Why, ask the opposition parties, were no measures brought forward for legislation on MPs’ expenses? To be fair, it is a good question.

Sir Christopher Kelly, the mandarin who drafted the reforms all the party leaders are on record as saying they want implemented, has even issued a statement expressing his disappointment.

Jon Craig at Sky has an excellent account of the way in which the issue is cutting across party lines. Some Labour and Tory MPs are discussing trying to block Sir Christopher’s rule changes being implemented.
Is that why the subject was not addressed in the Queen’s Speech? Did Number 10 fear a possible rebellion and think it better to ignore expenses and say instead that the changes can be implemented without legislation? If so, it suggests a serious misfiring in the engine room at of Number 10. Which issue has dominated U.K. politics other than the recession for the last six months? Answer: MPs’ expenses. How can any advisor worth his or her salt fail to point out to the PM that it would look very strange indeed not to lay out such reforms in the Queen’s Speech? Or did they do so only to be over-ruled?

Either way – whether it was deliberate or a slip-up – it’s a strategic blunder. The opposition parties will say the government is out of touch in neglecting to include measures to clean up parliament – the issue which troubles the public above almost all others right now. The Tories and Lib Dems now have, beyond the usual party politicking about this Queen’s Speech being all about the election and headlines, a clear line of attack. How bizarre for Brown to gift it to them.